It is a trivial matter to vary the integer variable "noi" in the appropriate script subroutine. 5 iterations is just the test case. These images represent a runBeen there, done that, but not that many times.
For reasonable stats you need a minimum of about 30 data points. Confidence with a sample of 5 is a bit scratchy.
The main warnings I got this time, were that the differential equation solvers were not reaching total convergence after 10,000 iterations each test.
I did not get these warnings on the original Monte Carlo altitude example file settings. When I put in the actual NOAA data at the various altitudes, there was differences in bearing, velocity, and temperature not evident in the example file. The Octave odepkg diff.eq. solver is probably the culprit here. I suspect the transitions between the various altitude levels was the factor in these warning messages.I don't know how Cambridge is choosing to solve the equations, but this sounds odd. The rocket trajectory ODEs are very straightforward to solve numerically. Even with time marching explicit schemes (Runge Kutta), and big time steps, the solutions are very stable. I have never seen RS, OR, or RA complain of convergence.
I work with some people that are quite pedantic about stats, so I just thought I'd mention it.
Sometimes in conversations I trot out the comment that "half the people are below average" just to bait them and get "half the people are below median" back
I work with some people that are quite pedantic about stats, so I just thought I'd mention it.
Sometimes in conversations I trot out the comment that "half the people are below average" just to bait them and get "half the people are below median" back
I did not get these warnings on the original Monte Carlo altitude example file settings. When I put in the actual NOAA data at the various altitudes, there was differences in bearing, velocity, and temperature not evident in the example file. The Octave odepkg diff.eq. solver is probably the culprit here. I suspect the transitions between the various altitude levels was the factor in these warning messages.
In using SU2 CFD on my sim aircraft, I often got failure to converge problems at high angles of attack using supercritical wing sections. As long as I kept angle-of-attack within reason (-2 to +10 degrees) they would converge after 200 to 300 iterations.
Enter your email address to join: